38

We need the creation of Facebook pages to attract Democrats, Republicans, and Independents

The Green Party has not been able to appeal to Americans at large, plain and simple. The spoiler argument, wasting your vote, The Green Party who, What the hell is the Green Party, are the Green Party environmental freaks, does the Green Party have elected members, can I purchase any Green Party merchandise, what is their platform, etc. etc. You guys get the idea. That’s why I propose the following: the creation of 3 brand new Facebook pages to be headed by Green Party members who happen to have a little extra time on their hands. This is what I would ideally like to name the pages…

“Democrats for the Green Party”
“Republicans for the Green Party”
“Independents for the Green Party”

I really believe this idea could take off because we could present the Green Party platform to up to 500 million facebook users. Just think of all the exposure and possibilities. The Democrats and Republicans have been ripping apart the Green Party for too long, so we are going to push back with the power of the written word! Now is the time guys! Don’t wait. How much longer are we going to sit around and do nothing?

38 Comments

  1. I would assume that the Green Party already has facebook pages correct? Why would these three particular pages be any more successful at attract people away from the Democrat and Republican party than the pre-existing pages?

  2. I think the common term for ““Democrats for the Green Party”, “Republicans for the Green Party”
    “Independents for the Green Party”, is just “Greens”.

  3. We have to look at the big picture. When people type in certain keywords into google, the search results will bring up Democrat related pages, with Green Party getting traffic. We cannot just appeal to our ow base. The Green Party pages don’t go on Democrat or Republican pages and post. That would just be cumbersome. But if we use pages to tell people why they should vote Green Party, we can have a ligitimate membership build up. So would anyone like to help out.
    I could scale down to two pages and take off the independent one for the moment.

  4. Keep all 3. I’m not on thefacebook so I can’t help, but this is what I’d suggest creating:

    “Democrats Who Vote Green”
    “Republicans Who Vote Green”
    “Independents Who Vote Green”

    If you need help creating content let me know. But it shouldn’t be hard for you to make, and manage, all 3 groups. Let those that join create the content (by posting on the wall).

  5. If you get those up, post the links on here. I plan on starting my “Register Republican for Ron Paul, Vote Green for Congress – 2012″ campaign soon, so I can add the “Republicans Who Vote Green” page to any writing I do on the subject.

  6. Green Party watch is SOOooooo far behind the times. Note the link in the right column of this page of Green Party Watch, to the AV or instant runoff video (IRV).

    The Sainte-Lague parliament seat distribution system is similar to IRV, but applies to districts where two or more names win in each district. The more the winners, the higher the voter satisfaction level.

    The Sainte-Lague parliament seat distribution system, isn’t about one winner, where one person is better than everyone else, like the single winner district system Green Party watch promotes.
    It’s about pure proportional representation (PRP, and in a 100-member district, the satisfaction level is raised to 99% plus 100 votes. In a 1000 member district, 99.9% plus 1000 votes elect a name, an even higher satisfaction level.

    What I’m writing about is teams of 100 or 1000. Not one person winning, but 100 winners (or 1000).

    Single winner districts perpetuate the two-party system. And that’s where IRV is used, and it’s no good.

    But check out the 8th USA Parliament. We’re a 100-member district which is in the process of expanding to 1000 members (MPs) in 2012, and your name is invited! As one member, you have one vote on the parliament in electing the executives and rules, too.

    Here’s our Cabinet, on which you and everyone is invited to self-appoint:

    The USA Parliament Cabinet Updated on 5/17/2011

    The Thirty-nine Full Cabinet Ministers

    Health and Human Services Minister Randy Hicks [Green]
    NASA Minister Joe Paul Manship [Libertarian]
    Chaos CHON Minister Seth Wetmore [Green Chaos]
    Platform Minister J.R. Myers [Constitution]
    Veterans Affairs Minister Gail Lightfoot [Libertarian]
    FBI Minister April Flint [Democratic]
    Chief of Staff Minister Helen Caldicott [Info. Not Avail.]
    National Security Minister Jodell Bumatay [Republican]
    CIA Minister Tippy Canoe [Roseannarchist]
    Families, Housing, Community and Indigenous People Minister Vicky Holte Takamine [Info. Not Avail.]
    Defense Minister Tina [Roseannarchist]
    Civil Rights Minister Robert Redford [Info. Not Avail.]
    Communications Minister Cynthia McKinney [Green]
    Truth Minister Grace Lee Boggs [Info. Not Avail.]
    Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Minister Marcy Kaptur [Democratic]
    Inspiration Minister Diane Wilson [Info. Not Avail.]
    Treasury Secretary Catherine Austin Fitts [Info. Not Avail.]
    Government Reduction Minister Greg Cipes [Info. Not Avail.]
    Environmental Minister Judy Chicago [Info. Not Avail.]
    Press Secretary Minister Christine Blosdale [Info. Not Avail.]
    FEMA Minister JZ Knight [Info. Not Avail.]
    Arts and Culture Minister Sandra Bernard [Info. Not Avail.]
    Attorney General Minister Link K. Scwartz [Info. Not Avail.]
    Campaign Minister Tom Maris [Democratic]
    Marketing Minister David Bell [Independent]
    Higher Education Minister Daniel David Gentry [Catholic Trotskyist]
    Education Minister Lisa Clampitt [Green Tea]
    Energy Minister Carey Campbell [Green]
    Speaker Minister John Argent [Roseannearchist]
    Secretary of State Minister PJ [Roseannearchist]
    PLAS Minister Dashus Christ [Roseannearchist]
    Senate Minister Lady Jane Green [Roseannearchist]
    Foreign Minister Jane Violet [Roseannearchist]
    Labor Minister Angela Keaton [Ordinary Anarchist]
    Transportation Minister Nathan Johnson [American Independent]
    Economics Minister Jim Burns [Libertarian]
    States Rights Minister Rene` Jean [Free Parliamentary]
    Spectrum Minister Nathan Sorenson [Christian Independent]
    IRS Minister Don J. Grundmann [Constitution]

    The Seventy Deputy Cabinet Ministers

    Deputy Civil Rights Minister Angela Davis [Info. Not Avail.]
    Deputy Civil Rights Minister Rosie O’Donnell [Info. Not Avail.]
    Deputy Inspiration Minister Jean Houston [Info. Not Avail.]
    Deputy Inspiration Minister Marianne Williamson [Info. Not Avail.]
    Deputy Inspiration Minister Jocelyn Elders [Info. Not Avail.]
    Deputy Treasury Secretary Elizabeth Warren [Info. Not Avail.]
    Deputy Treasury Secretary Annie Leonard [Info. Not Avail.]
    Deputy Treasury Secretary C. Michael Ward [Info. Not Avail.]
    Deputy Treasury Secretary Natalie Ward [Independent]
    Deputy Treasury Secretary Karen [Info. Not Avail.]
    Deputy Environmental Minister Adella Miketta [Info. Not Avail.]
    Deputy Press Secretary Colleen Camp Goldwyn [Info. Not Avail.]
    Deputy Press Secretary Mona Lisa Fortenberry [Info. Not Avail.]
    Deputy Press Secretary Shannon Hughy [Info. Not Avail.]
    Deputy Health Minister Marsha Gold [Info. Not Avail.]
    Deputy Health Minister Linda Evans [Info. Not Avail.]
    Deputy Health Minister Harriet Bookstein [Info. Not Avail.]
    Deputy FEMA Minister Lisa Carlson [Info. Not Avail.]
    Deputy FEMA Minister Louren Korba [Info. Not Avail.]
    Deputy FEMA Minister Melissa Nelson [Info. Not Avail.]
    Deputy Arts and Culture Minister Iyesha Sands [Info. Not Avail.]
    Deputy Arts and Culture Minister Hilary Liu [Info. Not Avail.]
    Deputy Attorney General Minister Diane Templin [American Independent]
    Deputy Chief of Staff Minister David Frey [Populist Socialist]
    Deputy Communications Minister Vanessa Morley [Defender of the Republic]
    Deputy Arts and Culture Minister Zachary Scott Gordon [American Libertarian]
    Deputy Truth Minister Gary Swing [Green]
    Deputy Veterans Affairs Minister Don Lake [American Independent]
    Deputy Communications Minister Tony De Renzo [Teapot]
    Deputy Speaker Minister James Ogle [Free Parliamentary]
    Deputy Senate Minister Jan Tucker [Peace and Freedom]
    Deputy Labor Minister Starchild [Libertarian]
    Deputy Foreign Minister Orion Karl Daley [Balanced]
    Deputy Foreign Minister Aarde Atheian [Libertarian]
    Deputy Environmental Minister Kristi Stone [Libertarian]
    Deputy Communications Minister Jim Doyle [Republican]
    Deputy Economics Minister Lawrence Samuels [Purple Libertarian]
    Deputy Economics Minister Byron Stephens [Libertarian]
    Deputy Inspiration Minister David Olkkola [Democratic]
    Deputy Government Reduction Minister Richard Winger [Libertarian]
    Deputy Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Minister Mike Bogatirev [Environmentalist]
    Deputy Civil Rights Minister Fox Grigor [Democratic]
    Deputy Economics Minister Ralph Hoffmann [Republican]
    Deputy Veterans Affairs Minister Cory Nott [Libertarian]
    Deputy Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Minister Rob Elliott [Independent]
    Deputy Economics Minister Dr. Loveless [National Barking Spider Resurgence]
    Deputy Health Minister Casper Leitch [Independent]
    Deputy Health Minister Robert S. [Pot]
    Deputy Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Minister Marie Phillips [Democratic]
    Deputy Communications Minister Alex Plewniak [Libertarian]
    Deputy Foreign Minister Dennis Davidsmeyer [Democratic]
    Deputy Foreign Minister Tony Dunsworth [Libertarian]
    Deputy Economics Minister William Johnson [Republican]
    Deputy Attorney General Minister Marge Buckley [Green]
    Deputy Civil Rights Minister C.L. Gannon [Liberty First]
    Deputy Secretary of State Josh Ondich [Coffee]
    Deputy Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Minister Mable Kovach [Democratic]
    Deputy Arts and Culture Minister Jorge Sanchez [Progressive Democrat/Green]
    Deputy Labor Minister Rhys Scarlett [United Socialism]
    Deputy Veterans Affairs Minister John Coffey [Unity08]
    Deputy Truth Minister Bill Palmer [Info. Not Avail.]
    Deputy Health Minister Kurt Brown [Pot]
    Deputy Press Secretary Eric Stevenson [Pizza]
    Deputy Economics Minister Kirk Joseph [Independent]
    Deputy Labor Minister Matt Lemmons [United Socialism]
    Deputy Communications Minister Markham Burton [Democratic]
    Deputy Health Minister Joseph Rogers [Green]
    Deputy Environmental Minister Thomas Leavitt [Green]
    Deputy Speaker Minister James Anthony [LEAP]
    Deputy Communications Minister Michael A. Cluley [America First]

    Nominate a new Cabinet Minister by emailing the name to joogle@gonott.com, or if you know how to improve the current list, like if someone wants to stand down or have a particular party/category corrected, please feel free to contact us.

    If you go to the Cabinet’s web page, you may click on many of the names (including yours, should you self-nominate) and then the hyperlink takes you to many of their own web pages:
    http://www.usparliament.org/cab-1.php

    Hope you like it, and we look forward to working with you!

    Very Truly Yours,
    –James Ogle [Free Parliamentary]
    volunteer vote counter

  7. The 8th USA Parliament is in need of more full Ministers, including a GLAS Minister (Green Libertarian Alliance Strategy).

    Please feel free to contact us if anyone wishes to be elected as the GLAS Minister or any other full Minister.

    –James Ogle [Free Parliamentary]
    http://www.usparliament.org/contact.php

  8. Speaking as a former “enrolled Green”, current “independent”, third party activist, and green activist…

    I think that the plan for greens to set up “Democrats for the Green Party” and Reps and Indies for the Green Party is a whim and gimick that doesn’t make much sense.

    First of all, it is very insincere. One of the reasons that fads take off, is because there is sincerely and passion behind them. If this is an effort among greens – even grassroots greens – then the names are pretty much lies and posturing. Now, if people who are disgruntled with the Democratic party want to set something up to bring their friends with them, I guess it makes sense.

    Also, someone had a similar (but better) idea awhile back. There was a web-site about “switching”, with a logo with a light-switch. It was more sincere. It encouraged people who had switched to Green to tell their story. And, so it would have tags and keywords that named the other parties.

    Reviving that site (not sure if it is still around?), or doing something in that manner might be useful. But, it is probably just as useful to try to grow by spreading the word by celebrating, magnifying, and reflecting the excellent green sites that already exist…such as Green Party Watch.

  9. P.S. Oh…a related anecdote…

    Awhile back, sometime in the Bush administration, some Harry Potter fan must have invented the bumper sticker we saw “Republicans for Voldemort”. Ha-ha, Voldemort is evil, you get it.

    Though, my husband thought about it and realized…

    Usually – like the proposal for “Democrats for the Green Party” above – those committees/groups that start with the party name are gimmicks with the opposite party. So, a famous, local Republican gets his Democratic friends to say Democrats for Mr. xxxx (the Republican).

    So…having Republicans for Voldemort – which became a popular bumper sticker – really proved that Voldemart was a Democrat. And/or, it proved that Democrats are evil.

    ;)

    (Democratic electeds and party bosses, that is…)

  10. The post about “Democrats who Vote Green Party” got me thinking. I personally like my idea of “Democrats for the Green Party” because it sounds all-encompassing, as opossed to single issues like “Democrats who vote Green.” But your post sounded more to the point, but now I feel like I can come up with an even better page name.

    To Kimberly, I could create a free website(a brand new one), but my main focus is facebook. Facebook, facebook, facebook!!!(I will probably create that website soon. Ill post it up) And yes, you are right, it is a gimmick, which will expose democrats, republicans, and independents who had not given the green party another chance to redeem themselves. I am doing this to drive more traffic for the green party. At this point, any exposure is better than no exposure.

    How about:
    “Democrats voting for the Green Party”
    “Republicans voting for the Green Party”
    “Independents voting for the Green Party”

    Im going to stick with the “Party” because if we just have the word Green at the end, they might just think we are some environmental group as opossed to a political party. There are a ton of green groups, but none are the green PARTY.

  11. Eddie,

    Thanks for the back and forth.

    I do think “Democrats voting for the Green Party” sounds better.

    But, still, isn’t a little insincere if that is the name of the FaceBook page, but a green really starts it?

    I guess it could make sense, as if you are sewing a banner, and hoping someone else will wave it.

    Other thoughts:

    Democrats considering the Green Party

    Insurgent Democrats for the Green Party
    Peace-loving Democrats for the Green Party
    Progressive Democrats for the Green Party
    (ie: help Democrats identify with what separates them from their party…)

    How about “Republicans Anonymous: Vote Green Party”

    ;)

  12. Insincere? Yes. Playing hardball?Yes. Stop apologizing? No. :p

    But we cannot be the party of being “too” pure. We first need to build the membeship. The pages will have reasons to join the Green Party and have people who left their respective parties. I can always modify the pages or create new ones. We need to truly begin active campaigning. No more standing in the sidelines. If I voted for Obama and turned Green, then technically Im on the “Democrats for the Green Party.”(This umbrella page can be used for a multitude of reasons. Let’s just see what happens. If it turns out to be a massive success, Ill be looking at you guys for never having done it in the first place. :p

  13. oh, and I like your ideas. But like I mentioned before, I want an all-emcopassing term, and you are presenting single issue ideas. I kow single issue ideas will work, but let me do these pages first.

  14. Eddie,

    Let me explain more about “insincere”…

    I know that some of politics is posturing. And, I know that some of politics is “framing” and “messaging” in ways that might feel like insincerity at first.

    But, if you want to be a genuine political leader and have a successful, grassroots political party, which empowers and mobilizes regular folks, you must keep it “sincere”. Not out of ethics, or of playing pure or goody-two-shoes, but because it is the only strategy that will work. And, because, if you get caught cheating, it will double-triple-backfire.

    I guess your “Democrats for the Green Party” might work if you either A. Have genuine Democrats on the team creating it OR as soon as someone clicks on it, you admit it is run by greens.

    You can’t fool the public very long. If you do it in a fake or insincere way, you will probably get caught, and people will dislike it.

    But, in addition, if you can tap into sincerity, that is a huge, well of abundance and enthusiasm. Staying sincere is like fuel for the wildfire of a grassroots, political message. It will only resonate and become vibrate if it is genuine.

    My humble opinion.

  15. How about

    “Democrats considering the Green Party?”

    It sounds less “insincere”

  16. Hello, Eddie,

    Now, we have gone back and forth so many times, it seems like a brainstorm. And, I am not even sure if I am in the same place I was at the beginning of the conversation.

    But, I guess I mean that it should sound like it comes from the Green Party, if greens start it.

    So, if you want to head down that path, what about invitations:

    Dear Democrats: Think Green Party

    Invitation to Democrats: How about this?

    Invitation to Republicans: Make friends with the Green Party

    Or, something like that…???

    Or, how about “Like this if you are a Democrat considering the Green Party”

  17. Kimberly wrote:
    “[snip, snip….]
    Dear Democrats: Think Green Party
    Invitation to Democrats: How about this?
    Invitation to Republicans: Make friends with the Green Party
    Or, something like that…???
    Or, how about “Like this if you are a Democrat considering the Green Party”
    * * *

    Kimberly, it’s good of you to try to come up with ideas to help the Green Party, and I commend your efforts. However, in my county, Monterey County California, I’m taking a different track.

    I’m finding that the local Green Party won’t even return a phone call or a email, and even on the state level, members of the Green Party who want to participate under 100-member elected districts, based on pure proportional representation, are few and far between.

    I’m having some luck in my county with the Green Chaos, Purple Libertarian, Demo, and aqua tangerine Parties, but everyone participates on different ways and different levels, and the diversity is almost endless. Are you following me?

    From my experience, it’s best to set up a tool for cooperation, rather than trying to convert people to the Green Party. That way, when people are elected as a team of 100, and they recognize the mathematical fact that the Green Party received X% of the votes, and therefore won x% of the seats, then there is a much better bases for cooperation on various levels.

    The Sainte-Lague parliament seat distribution system is by far the most mathematically perfect tool for doing just that in elections, decisions and governance in general.

    So if you’re trying to build a structure for 2012, I highly recommend that you use the Sainte-Lague as your building blocks, from my 16 years of experience with it, and continual open-ended steady growth.

    Please, forget about IRV (instant runoff voting) which Green Party Watch promotes. That system will just harm your efforts by electing one person districts. IRV doesn’t allow for gender balance, while two or more seats per district does, and IRV is only for single winner districts.

    For me, the Sainte-Lague’s systems psychology is “the more the better”, not “one person is better” under IRV.

    Hope you like the Sainte-Lague parliament seat distribution system! It allows the Green, Constitution, Libertarian, all parties, independents, voters and non voters to coordinate and work together better, thus electing the Green Party to their fair share too.

    Peace,
    –James Ogle [Free Parliamentary]
    volunteer vote counter

  18. Eddie and Kimberly, the basic problem with what you’re writing about and trying to do, is that it appears that you’re trying to promote a “three-party system”, at the exclusion of all others (who may make up an even larger majority of the three).
    –James Ogle [Free Parliamentary]
    volunteer vote counter

  19. I wonder if that’s too obvious and in your face.

    Why not create groups such as “get America off of petrol” (or words to the same effect) and just have “The Green Party” as links and creators.

    If you do this with policies which the majority like, then you can test policies support, people can comment and even make suggestions, and it will avoid force-feeding the idea of the green party.

    Like you said, if the green party has a poor image, it shouldn’t be the opening line of your Facebook campaign… Entice peoe in with attractive policies, if it truly resonates with the American (or British) people, then people will like the group, and you will have your name slapped as creator of the idea…

    At the very least, you may raise support for pressure groups who want to fight for the same values as you.

    On the groups perhaps have links to news articles such as ones highlighting the environmental impact of Fracking, as a technique to withdraw the environmentally “friendly” natural gases…

    I could go on… But I may lose you… Here’s an email, cause its just by chance that I came on here so won’t see feedback: georgie_porgie_96@hotmail.com

  20. So I have been reading the new messages and I agree with Kimberly and I actually really like her latest ideas. I know when I was thinking of the page names, I personally felt disingenuous because it felt something a Green would not attempt. But I also kept thinking that this is the problem of the Greens of not trying new things, thinking outside the box, just doing something, because the Dems and Repubs have been the most deceitful parties and we need to out-strategize them. But I am glad you gave me feedback, Kimberly, and I will go ahead and use your latest ideas. Im trying to decide between

    “Dear Democrats:Think Green Party”

    and

    “Invitation to democrats:Make friends with the greens”

    but the second is not strong enough and I will likely go ahead with the first idea. If anyone has an even better name, be my guest.

    In addition, I will make them Facebook groups as opposed to just pages to can like. With a group, you can send invitations to all the members at once, they receive updates on comments, and are able to instant message. I can also make a “like” page, but when I nvite people to join the page, I would like then to join the group and not just “like” the group. We need to engage people.

  21. George, why don’t you go ahead and make the page. Im a Green of less than a year who was already made great strides in the cohesiveness of the party. I have started the campaign to change Green Party pages to have “Partido Verde” in them.

    I wonder why some people seem to use facebook but are not willing to help out the green party with a new facebook page. Help me out guys. Im just one guy! If I had just 2 of you guys, that would help out tremendously. I know we all have at least 3-4 hours a weeks to help out. When do you expect the Green Party to grow? In 2015? Now is the time!!

  22. We’ve got Economics Minister Jim Burns [Libertarian] sending in over 25 paper ballots from southern Nevada. We need another party to start coordinating, since PM Roseanne Barr [Green Tea] has been busy recording her next show in Hawaii.

    The current cycle for the 8th USA Parliament elections which is practice for 2012, ends on August 5th, 2011.

    If anyone has time to get some voters rank choices for our team, we could use some new people who are willing to work with all parties and independents. The Libertarian Party’s southern chair whose name is Boomer lives in the San Bernardino County would be a good person to contact, if you’re for multiple parties working together. We need new people from all regions.

    I’m registered with the California American Independent Party, and we’re adopting the All Party System in Monterey County, and perhaps California and the entire USA in 2012.

    If you or anyone wants to work with “Team United”, feel free to contact me for more information.

    As you can see by our Cabinet, every political party benefits from this, in proportion to the numbers of votes their candidates garner under pure proportional representation.

    I invite you and everyone to join the “Team United”.

    –James

  23. James, how about you go and promote what you are doing in some other websites or threads. Plus, many of us know how the American Independent party functions.

  24. James – You could also come out to SF tomorrow night for the GP meeting, and even help with the Terry Baum campaign for Mayor. However, I assume you will say that participating in a real campaign/election is a waste of time and that we should run for fake offices in the “US Parliament.” Sigh…

    – Jack
    “Ron Paul for President/Green Party for Congress – 2012″

  25. To Eddie

    The American Independent Party of Monterey County has 25 central committee member positions open, and none of them are currently filled. Elections start next January.

    The state chair is Spectrum Minister Nathan Sorenson [Christian Independent], and he has given me the green light for merging the USA Parliament’s Sainte-Lague parliament distribution system into their county, state and national voting system.

    I am trying to unite the national American Independent, Independent, all parties, independents, voters and non voters under one women who will be both chair and US Presidential candidate, Queen/Prime Minister Roseanne Barr [Green Tea].

    So if there was any confusion by you as to how the American Independent Party functions, now you know. We will be using the Sainte-Lague parliament seat distribution system in Monterey County, possibly state and national elections too.

    If you saw the national Cabinet in a post above, that’s the American Independent Party’s Cabinet too. We have Health and Human Services Minister Randy Hicks [Green], Communications Minister Cynthia McKinney [Green], as well as many other Green members and factions, like Green Tea, Green Chaos, Green Libertarian…etc. etc.

    Forget about everything you ever knew before about the American Independent Party, and now you may start from scratch, based on verifiable and valifiable ballots cast, kept as proof.

    I will be happy to provide such ballots for your review if you’re interested in seeing them.

    Perhaps you were trying to paint us as exclusionary, but the reverse is true. You can call the state chair if you wish to verify, that Prime Minister Roseanne Barr [Green Tea] is our elected Queen under the “Queen rule”, rule #34. Patriarchy is no longer a reality in the AIP.

    We have five princesses too.

    Hope you like the new California American Independent Party (AIP), of which I am a registered member. And I am more than pleased and eager to answer any question you might have, though a bit limited by the medium. I’m glad you’ve written that you know how we work, you must’ve been reading my recent comments.

    Maybe you know more now?

    Peace,
    –James Ogle [Free Parliamentary]

  26. To Jack,

    Thank you very much for your interest, I do have several friends who live and/or work in SF and would have loved to have attended. I’m anxiously and eagerly trying to expand our numbers in the San Francisco Mini-state Parliament. If you know of any names, this is an open-ended appointment system, and it’s not connected to “real” elections.
    http://www.usparliament.org/ss11-2.php

    Deputy Communications Minister Tony De Renzo [Teapot] who is friends with Gonzales (sp?), Deputy Labor Minister Starchild [Libertarian], Mediator Minister Victoria Peterson [Independent], Treasurer Minister: Frank Garcia [Info. Not Avail.] and MP Dennis Peron [Republican] are a few of my friends, to name a few that come to mind.

    I also have friends in Marin County, and Princess Marnie Glickman [Green] is our #1 ranked Princess, a great recent development over the past few weeks. Our five elected Princesses are from five differing categories/parties.

    I won’t be traveling up to SF however, because I am of limited income and don’t travel much except by bicycle.

    Thanks very much for the invitation though, I wish we could work together more. Many opportunities have been missed in SF, with all parties and independents working together based on votes cast a proof.

    Again, thank you very much for the conversation, and I look forward to more colorful engagement with you and everyone. I will try to periodically check these threads, and hopefully the moderator won’t continue to have me barred. They must not be for the Sainte-Lague parliament seat distribution system?

    Peace be with you,
    Very Truly Yours,
    –James Ogle [Free Parliamentary]
    volunteer vote counter

  27. BTW, ss11-2 is a mini-state parliament with only small number of members. Our more full mini-states are ss11-1 and ss11-6, the Nor Call (24 counties) and Central Cal (12 counties) and they each have 100 elected names, five elected executives (three prime ministers and two secretaries), and together they make up 36 of the lessor populated, more rural counties.

    The 8th SA Parliament sports twelve population balanced super-states, and each super-state is then organized as twelve population balanced mini-states, and no counties or state boundaries are breached when making the groups, with give level voting members in all states and counties.

    We’ve found that rural and cosmopolitan regions have differing needs that need to be addresses while electing representatives to governing bodies.

    Credit goes to Oregon’s 22nd Prime Minister Charles Bruce Stewart [Green Libertarian], elected 4/13/2011, for helping with the population balancing calculations and guidelines.

    –James Ogle [Free Parliamentary]
    volunteer vote counter

  28. I wrote “The 8th SA Parliament”, sorry I meant “8th USA Parliament”.

    Also, the 36 rural counties make up a majority of the 58 counties in California, although the rural counties are often over-looked by many because their populations are spread out and sparse.

    By grouping the sparsely populated counties into mini-states, and sparsely populated states into super-states, this really helps to organize like never before.

    I’m currently trying to recruit US Senate candidates (and US Congress and state candidates) into a national coalition of all parties and independents in coordination for pure proportional representation. Under our rule #32, our next president and vice president of the 9th USA Parliament, will be able to elect a national coalition of US Senate candidates, based on votes cast as proof.
    http://www.usparliament.org/rules.php

    For example, if we elect a Constitution Party president and a Green Party vice president, then potentially they’d each rank US Senate candidates and elect about 16 Constitution and 16 Green US Senate candidates, under rule #32.

    Hope you like it!

  29. I’m pretty sure they barred you for posting excessively long posts that were unrelated to the focus of this website, such as complete lists of all your fantasy candidates.

    I know Marnie too. Didn’t know she was royalty.

    Outside of it being a fantasy game, I have a lot of conceptual problems with US Parliament, and the concept of Parliament and Proportional Representation in general.

    Queen and Princess? I am no fan of royalty, and in a free society, government shouldn’t recognize such things. I think it is inexcusable for the US Parliament to conduct itself in such a manner. What gives you the right to elect royalty to rule over me?

    And partisanship is a danger to liberty and freedom. You’ve seen what happens in real-life when groups are allowed expedited access to government over the individual. It leads to special interests running our government. Political Parties need to be abolished in favor of a even, public funded, election, where all candidates must perform the same requirement to get on the [General] Ballot (there would, of course, be no Primary). All elections (other than President) should be done with IRV (or Ranked Choice Voting).

    In addition, representatives (state and Congress) should represent as few people as possible (I’d like to see the House Rep 100,000 people each (bringing our House to about 3,000 members). If you look at New Hampshire, their state house is the largest per population in the country, giving their citizens more access to their government. Representatives should represent people, not groups, ideals, or parties. PEOPLE!!!!

    The election of U.S. Senators should be returned to the State’s – eliminating yet one more big profile and distracting race from the ballots. Spring Elections should focus on Local Issues and Offices, and Fall Elections should focus on State Elections and offices (every other focusing on National Offices). People would be able to actually grasp everything that is going on in each election. Voter turn out would increase (especially with a better range of candidates and IRV, and with all the partisan fighting being removed).

    So, I’m sorry, but I need to vote NO on the US Parliament. I don’t like it, fantasy or reality. As a fantasy it is a distraction, and as reality it would be a disaster.

  30. Jack…forgot to mention John Dennis [Republican] candidate for US Congress in SF and friend of Patricia Burns [Republican] who works in SF, and lives in Marin County.

    Patricia Burns [Republican] is coool. She loves Ron Paul…how about “Paul/Burns for President? :)

    I take it you live in the Sacramento region? I’d love to go into how the single-winner districts in SF would compare to at-large ranked voting which would be the Sainte-Lague system. In the latter way, the first 11 names winning 1/12th of the total votes (or 8.5%) plus one vote, would each win one of the 11 seats…lowering the threshold to 8.5% plus one vote per winner, and increasing the total satisfaction level from 50% plus eleven votes under their current system, to 91.5% plus eleven votes under at-large Sainte-Lague.

    But first, I’d like to answer your questions/comments about the Royalty. See below, I’ve tried to answer your comments one by one.

    Jack:
    >I’m pretty sure they barred you for posting excessively long posts that were unrelated to the >focus of this website, such as complete lists of all your fantasy candidates.

    Me:
    Well then I suggest the post the rules for posting. And as for you judging as to whether my posts are “unrelated”, that’s simply false. My posts relate to exposing exclusionary practices for all voters and non voters, including Green Party members. And in regards to posting candidates, your description is incorrect. I posted elected full Cabinet and Deputy Cabinet Ministers. The current candidates, more than 160 names nominated to the Central California Mini-state Parliament and more than 110 names nominated to the PacificNW Super-state Parliament, those names were not posted. Every name was nominated, and each person could nominate up to three names in the Central California Mini-state Parliament Election.

    You:
    > I know Marnie too. Didn’t know she was royalty.

    Me:
    Well now you know. She was please to be elected our #1 Princess (the other four are tied at 2nd) under the Princess rule, rule #36.

    You:
    >Outside of it being a fantasy game, I have a lot of conceptual problems with US Parliament, >and the concept of Parliament and Proportional Representation in general.

    Me:
    I am a volunteer vote counter, and I’m sorry to hear that you have problems. Perhaps if you had the stack of ballots yourself, and distributed the 100 seats, then you’d understand? I’d be happy to help.

    You:
    Queen and Princess? I am no fan of royalty, and in a free society, government shouldn’t recognize such things.

    Me:
    We’re like Burger King, it’s “have it your way”. Prime Minister Roseanne Barr [Green Tea] wanted to be Queen, and Dizzy Loo [Constitutional Monarchist] nominated her, so I ran it by the ruling coalition and after writing the Queen rule, rule #34, the rules were approved by the ruling coalition thus electing her Queen.

    It’s not an absolute monarchy, it’s a constitutional monarchy. Barr’s descendents don’t inherit any of the parliament, and since rule #34 was elected by the ruling coalition, she’s accountable.

    Currently, the only purpose Queen serves, is to create a link to her rree speech blog, which she pays for. That way the parliament doesn’t have to pay a programmer to maintain our forum, and we can have free speech activities.

    As far as the Princesses go, well we needed a system for electing a new Queen, in case the Queen died. You know, “The Queen is dead. Long live the (new) Queen”.

    You:
    >I think it is inexcusable for the US Parliament to conduct itself in such a manner. What gives >you the right to elect royalty to rule over me?

    Me:
    I repeat. Queen in title only. I guess we could have given her the title “chief mechanic”, then maybe you’d be ok with that? But the Queen rule just seemed better to me. Do you have a better idea?

    You:
    >And partisanship is a danger to liberty and freedom. You’ve seen what happens in real-life when >groups are allowed expedited access to government over the individual.

    Me:
    No, I’ve lost you here…

    You:
    > It leads to special interests running our government. Political Parties need to be abolished in >favor of a even, public funded, election, where all candidates must perform the same >requirement to get on the [General] Ballot (there would, of course, be no Primary). All elections >(other than President) should be done with IRV (or Ranked Choice Voting).

    Me:
    The party name is just a word(s) of communication to the voter. I can understand that you’re not favorable to parties, when the two-party system pretty much prohibits any real competition. However, in our system of electing 100 to 1000 names simultaneously,we need words by the name to help the voter identify what the candidate stands for, when the voter enters the voting booth. A party label (or independent) is a free speech tool that helps educate the voter. By prohibiting party names, those conducting the election are stifling free speech.

    You:
    >In addition, representatives (state and Congress) should represent as few people as possible >(I’d like to see the House Rep 100,000 people each (bringing our House to about 3,000 >members). If you look at New Hampshire, their state house is the largest per population in the >country, giving their citizens more access to their government. Representatives should >represent people, not groups, ideals, or parties. PEOPLE!!!!

    Me:
    The better and more exect the representation, the better. A 1000 member national assembly is prferred to me over a 535 member Congress, and 100 Senators.

    You:
    >The election of U.S. Senators should be returned to the State’s – eliminating yet one more big >profile and distracting race from the ballots. Spring Elections should focus on Local Issues and >Offices, and Fall Elections should focus on State Elections and offices (every other focusing on >National Offices). People would be able to actually grasp everything that is going on in each >election. Voter turn out would increase (especially with a better range of candidates and IRV, >and with all the partisan fighting being removed).

    Me:
    I’ve already mention IRV is no good, because that is a single-winner district, and single winner districts attract neanderthals who think that only one person is better than everyone else. Egotists. Meanie men. You can’t have gender balance and team work in single winner IRV districts. I am totally against IRV, and I am for two-member districts or more. Preident and vice president should be elected as a two-member district. The USA Parliament is a 100 member and next year, a 1000 member district. We still have #1 and #2 (president and vice president) and we also have #s 3 to 100, who have 98 votes. That way, the powers of the president and vice president are diminished by #s 3 to 100, and the rules and executives (three prime ministers and two secretaries) are dynamic though out the four year terms. We’re not stuck with a dictatorial executive for four years, because once the ruling coalition is formed, the executives are rotated in and out like five basket ball players. When some need a rest, or want to take turns, a new one that’s better is rotated in, to take their place.

    Look at the USA Parliament, we still have President Ron Paul [Republican] and Vice President Gail Lightfoot [Libertarian] as #s 1 & 2, but we’re not dependent on them for much:
    http://www.usparliament.org/

    It works great!

    Jack:
    >So, I’m sorry, but I need to vote NO on the US Parliament. I don’t like it, fantasy or reality. As a >fantasy it is a distraction, and as reality it would be a disaster.

    I just told you, it works great. We’re able to determine who the team players are, and who the neanderthals are, and that way we can avoid the dictatorial neanderthals, who prefer a primative system.

    Hope you like it. I’ll be happy to answer any question you have. But you might want to study what we have more. It works a lot better to have open arms for cool people of all kinds, who agree that 50% plus one vote is a majority, while protecting the rights on minorities too.

    Best,

    –James

  31. Well, Im sure by now the admins of this page are realizing that your long posts have nothing to do with the subject, and they will be hearing from me. You really should stay on the subject, or go elsewhere. This is the GREENPARTYWATCH. It’s meant for Green Party views and news.

  32. me:
    James, please find somewhere else to post your off-topic ramblings. I suggest you start your own blog instead of hijacking others.Thanks.

  33. Jack:
    I find direct email to be much more effective than Facebook. I’ve been maintaining an email list since around 1995, which has grown to more than 220 addresses. Among the email addresses are about 40 to 50 news reporters and writers, including around 15 from the SF Chronicle.

    They’re all just watching and waiting, cycle after cycle, for when all parties and independents are going to start working together more, and the 8th USA Parliament provides a tool. When you check out the votes cast/activity of the eballots cast in 2010, you get a good sense of who the team players are, from among the 42 candidates for state office (including seven Green Party members).

    See 2010 eballots from candidates:
    http://www.usparliament.org/forum/viewforum.php?f=31&sid=f1eb070ab462675d7b33f5c6ffabbc43

    Turns out, the Constitution and Independent Party candidates, plus Peace and Freedom candidate for Lt. Gov, CT Weber [Peace and Freedom] were among the cooperators.

    Facebook…eh! Gave up on that one, can’t do everything. If pretty much costs double time for each response that you want to initiate.

  34. …forgot to mention some Libertarian Party members like all parties and independents working together…under a single parliamentary ballot. But Prime Minister Roseanne Barr [Green Tea], has been probably one of the best supporters.

  35. Hey James, I guess since I am an administrator of this website, I have the power of clicking away your comments. So quit while you are ahead, unless you post Green Party related news. No more American Independent Party announcements for your pet project.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.